Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
ERHE will not be drilling, they have full carry in their blocks.
Did you miss this?
"STP News: Oneline Vitrina and PNN reporting a US delegation expected in Sao Tome by end month to beginn setting up GoG's first US-financed "regional MARITIME supervision center."
Dubbed "Marine Domain Awareness," the project, negotiated between Pres Menezes and Washington, will be financed by US Navy.
To include automated radar system to scan GoG and share info with neighboring countries."
Do you really believe that in Block 2 - ERHC's 17% in with Sinopec as majority - will draw terrorist attention targeting Western companies (as the article suggested)? And, with Chevron and Exxon sitting right next door in Block 1?!?!
The whole point of the article was that terrorists want to attack the West. I'd be very suprised if the Nigerian govt. would harbor terrorists and then "allow" them to attack their biggest benefactor, China, who has a minority partner that's largest shareholder is a Nigerian Chief.
What am I missing here?
"STP News: Oneline Vitrina and PNN reporting a US delegation expected in Sao Tome by end month to beginn setting up GoG's first US-financed "regional MARITIME supervision center."
Dubbed "Marine Domain Awareness," the project, negotiated between Pres Menezes and Washington, will be financed by US Navy.
To include automated radar system to scan GoG and share info with neighboring countries."
And, furthermore, Al Queda being in Nigeria will just give the US a stronger case for patrolling these waters. There have been quite a few articles on the Navy's increased presence here - in fact, I think they're establishing some sort of base in or around STP. Don't remember all the details but check Homeport's postings on the ERHE board.
Never mind, I finished reading the entire article and got the idea. Basically, this journalist is saying that they will build camps there and then strike at Western targets in Nigeria.
Well, the good news for ERHC anyway, is that the only US majors currently in the JDZ are in block 1 of which ERHC has no percentage.
This whole thing is confusing to me - they say it's a haven with recruiting grounds and then in the next paragraph says they are targets for jihad? Am I missing something?
"CBN.com – (CBN News) - Yelwa, Nigeria - Four years after being squeezed out of its sanctuary in Afghanistan, al Qaeda is eyeing Nigeria as a haven for global terrorism. A recent UN investigation has uncovered al Qaeda training and recruiting bases in this West African nation.
Dr. Princeton Lyman, a former U.S. Ambassador to Nigeria, says it is a natural target for terrorists looking to expand their operations.
Lyman, said, “You have 60 million or more Muslims in Nigeria. It is the most populous state, and it is a country in which there has been a long history of religious tension, sometimes well-managed, sometimes not well-managed. If you wanted to target a state in West Africa, that's the one you target.”
And apparently Osama Bin Laden thinks so too. In a video message broadcast on the Arab television station al-Jazeera, the terror mastermind singled out Nigeria, because of its close ties with Washington, as a country worthy of jihad -- making the threat of a terrorist attack on Nigerian soil a very real possibility.
Lyman commented, “...and that in itself is very damaging to international interests.”
I sent the below as a "private reply" and then decided I would prefer it to be public.
Sent By: rocky822 Date: 7/15/2006 8:59:44 PM
"Don't be rediculous !"
"investors to stop being such meek little lambs"
"no scarcity of longs becoming defensive of any criticism"
"I'm only telling people to get off their arse"
"I'm not the enemy here you should thank me"
"rather than all the small minded back , forth squabbling that goes on here day after day"
"Yeah right thats what I call reaching !"
"you must be into reading those tea leaves again !! No one else here seems privy to this kind of information or any other kind for that matter ! lol"
"So you are intimidated by an open discussion"
"So you be a good little boy and say nothing !"
"But you be a good boy and toe the party line !!"
"This site is for sharing information but not a social gathering!"
Stay the Course, I know you were responding to Amj, but feel the need to comment on your post.
I don't take exception with the argument that management needs to put out more information. (Edit: In fact, I've never posted on this topic previously.) This same issue has been debated here numerous times without most posters feeling the need to dictate to and belittle others with opposing views.
The majority of his posts are offensive to me as he chooses to attack the posters who disagree with him on this issue.
I disagree when you say we need to grow some robustness in re: to this poster. The information in his posts has been poorly presented and misleading. And, imo, these should not go unquestioned.
But, I do feel that we should be able to expect civil, mature discourse on all topics.
I am not trying to start (nor will be involved) in a debate here about whether he should or should not be allowed to post on this board. I simply wanted to give you a different side of the argument on why, I, for one, didn't welcome his previous posts.
What were you told when you called? tia.
Absolutely! I think it's the MOST valuable information available. In fact, when doing any due diligence on a company, I spend much more time on the SEC filings than I do on the pr's.
And, if you want information from the company, then it's best to go directly to them. "but I am requesting that management communicate with the people"
Maybe instead of trying to place the blame on others about the reception you've received here, you should look to yourself and your posts.
And, I don't see anyone "defending" management. Most posters are civilly discussing their opinion on what information should or should not be released at this point.
Furthermore, "ZERO percent information month after month" - I count 11 public documents filed since 1/06. And, in fact, it appears that, each month, since January there has been information made public for investors.
Fri, Jun 30, 2006
• ERHC ENERGY INC Files SEC form 8-K, Other Events
EDGAR Online (Fri, Jun 30)
Thu, Jun 29, 2006
• ERHC Energy Update on Investigation Into Activities in Joint Development Zone
Market Wire (Thu, Jun 29)
Wed, May 31, 2006
• ERHC ENERGY INC Financials
EDGAR Online Financials (Wed, May 31)
Mon, May 22, 2006
• ERHC ENERGY INC Files SEC form 10-Q, Quarterly Report
EDGAR Online (Mon, May 22)
• ERHC ENERGY INC Files SEC form 10-Q, Quarterly Report
EDGAR Online (Mon, May 22)
Fri, May 19, 2006
• ERHC ENERGY INC Financials
EDGAR Online Financials (Fri, May 19)
Fri, May 5, 2006
• ERHC ENERGY INC Files SEC form 8-K, Other Events
EDGAR Online (Fri, May 5)
• ERHC ENERGY INC Files SEC form 8-K, Other Events
EDGAR Online (Fri, May 5)
Thu, Apr 27, 2006
• ERHC ENERGY INC Files SEC form 10-K/A, Annual Report
EDGAR Online (Thu, Apr 27)
Thu, Mar 30, 2006
• ERHC ENERGY INC Files SEC form 8-K, Change in Directors or Principal Officers
EDGAR Online (Thu, Mar 30)
Thu, Mar 16, 2006
• ERHC ENERGY INC Files SEC form 8-K, Entry into Material Agreement
EDGAR Online (Thu, Mar 16)
Thu, Feb 9, 2006
• ERHC ENERGY INC Files SEC form 10-Q, Quarterly Report
EDGAR Online (Thu, Feb 9)
Wed, Jan 25, 2006
• ERHC ENERGY INC Files SEC form 8-K, Termination of Material Agreement, Change in Directors or Principal Officers
EDGAR Online (Wed, Jan 25)
Jim, what "forum" were you using previously? Do you post on Raging Bull?
And, what about ERHE being in the US is a problem?
'Today i assume i missed something "big."
Can I ask why you think this? tia.
OT:
[Chorus:]
Come Monday It'll be all right,
Come Monday I'll be holding you tight.
I spent four lonely days in a brown L.A. haze
and I just want you back by my side.
Ok, so again you're "agenda" as you stated previously, is to make shareholders do what YOU think they should? Again, how dare you tell me how to determine what to do with my shares?
Hey, I thought you were going out of town for some R&R? You back so soon or just checking in?
Emdyal - your agenda is to tell others what to do in regards to their investments? Huh? Who do you think you are?
Time to move on - you showed your true colors much too quickly, imo.
Oilman, this is where you and I part ways:
"However, with large US oil companies also exposed, it seems possible that they could influence the US govt to get them portions of ERHE rights if they were obtained illegally, in exchange for ERHE being allowed to continue business and as a financial penalty to the company. All preliminary thoughts and guesses on my part, but seems possible."
Maybe I'm naive here, but I truly can't figure out how the US govt can barter ERHC's rights to the JDZ. These rights are governed by a treaty with two foreign countries. Can you explain how you think this may be accomplished?
Mrogop - Wise move not to tell your friends. I actually convinced 2 to get in at about .89 before the raid. GROANNNNN! Needless to say, they are no longer shareholders...(Edit-and I am no longer making recommendations to buy!)
Ee, I actually consider this a very high risk stock but am comfortable enough with my due diligence to think I am taking a calculated risk.
Imo, many people don't want to spend the time it takes to understand this company. There are plenty of other investments out there that require alot less due diligence on the part of the shareholder. For example, I've had to learn about the oil industry, about Nigeria, about the JDZ, about China's relationship to Nigeria, FCPA rules and ramifications, legal info re: the search warrant, etc. To me it's been very interesting and informative. Not very lucrative, however, in terms of relationship to the time I've spent doing research. Which is, after all, the main goal here.
And, just to be clear, I'm not saying there is very little risk. I'm saying after all I've read, these are the conclusions I've come to thus far. There could be a case out there where a companies' rights were stripped by the US govt, and I just haven't come across it yet.
So, maybe others know I'm off my rocker and that the US can easily put ERHC out of business. Maybe that's why they are staying away - I really don't know.
I think what has you confused when you say "or what?" is people's risk tolerance. I am willing to take this risk, but have no friends who are willing to. They think I'm crazy to be invested in a Nigerian Oil stock with 3 employees and a Nigerian Chief as the major stock holder, who by the way, has also just had their offices raided for potential FCPA violations. Put that way it doesn't seem like a very attractive investment and I believe this is all most see.
Those are my thoughts, I hope it's a little helpful.
Oilman, I have researched this stuff to death (read my prior post). And, imho, what I came up with is:
*I can't find any example of the US being able to nullify contracts in other countries.
*I have seen many instances of fines for companies and indictments for individuals responsible.
Therefore, I think the responsibility of acting on any thing from this investigation will come from STP or Nigeria.
*I believe STP and Nigeria would like the drilling to begin immediately.
*I believe STP NEEDS the cash sooner rather than later.
*ERHE has already sold portions of their rights to other companies.
*If either of these countries try to mess with the current situation in the JDZ, all blocks with ERHE involved in will be tied up for years in International Court.
*I don't believe either country wants that to happen.
*In the case of a conviction, I believe that STP may try to renegotiate the EEL rights.
I further believe that China has made so many inroads in Nigeria (and, actually, all of Africa) that they have very little to fear from the US choosing not to work with them in the future.
I may be wrong in all of these beliefs, however, I have yet to find evidence that dissuades me of these. I would welcome that information if anyone could supply it.
As I posted previously, maybe you don't realize that most (if not all) have seen these links you've supplied on the ERHE board. Whether they chose to read them or not, I have no idea. But, I read quite a few to come up with my theories. And, honestly, I just don't have the energy to read anymore right now. If you find something contrary to what I've stated above, I'd would be very interested to read it.
Oilman007- Maybe what you don't realize is this is the JDZ board and ERHE discussion is mostly held on the ERHE board.
The ERHE board has had numerous posts on all of this. This subject has been discussed in minute detail over the last few months.
My guess is ERHE investors on this board, get the majority of their info re: ERHE from that board. Therefore, your posts here seem contrived to continue to bring up topics that have been already been discussed in depth on the ERHE board.
Imo, no one on this board is trying to hide anything about the investigation - it's just old news.
Under the Convention, participating countries must take measures to establish the liability of companies (“legal persons”) that engage in bribery acts. Countries are also required to impose effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions, including monetary sanctions (i.e. fines and confiscation of the bribes and proceeds of bribery or property the value of which corresponds to the proceeds), and should consider imposing additional civil or administrative sanctions, such as disbarment from public tenders or disqualification from public subsidies. Companies accused of bribery acts risk serious damage to their "corporate image," a fact that can also be very dissuasive. The most important message companies should take from the Convention is that they need to beware of practices that encourage or ignore foreign bribery—or risk serious penalties."
However, I didn't see Nigeria or Sao Tome on list of those participating.
And, who is your broker that's asking you to cover? Tia.
OT: Thanks, I'll keep it on my radar.
Sorry if I missed it, but who is your broker? tia.
I almost got a earth attack, they are mad those filipian guys.[/i}
OT: All posters can private message Matt or Dave. That's one of the ways they differentiate Ihub from other boards - you can always talk with someone in administration. Go to the link below and click on Send a Private Message.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/profile.asp?User=2744
Umbra, this question was asked and Dave (grubmaster), ihub administrator answered this way.
Posted by: grubmaster
In reply to: rgzoo who wrote msg# 68838 Date:7/12/2006 1:50:22 PM
Post #of 68853
By staying within the lines with your 3 PPD.
So, in another words, as long as you don't post anymore of what you were jailed for during your 3 posts per day, you can get your others back.
And, I'm pretty sure the moderators on this board do not make these decisions. Think you have to appeal to Matt and/or Dave. I also think you can private message them so you don't have to waste one of your 3 posts re: your reinstatement.
OT: Yes, it's a long list but not as long as I think some were expecting. Unfortunately, I'm "stuck" in 2 pinks, got greedy and missed the runs.
Re: hlsh, did you see that Scushy finally got the "guilty" verdict? Didn't follow it that closely, and even I can't figure out how the the original jury came up with "innocent".
Glty.
TFA - there are pinks listed today.
http://www.pinksheets.com/marketactivity/reg_sho_list.jsp
SEC Approves New Rule 3210 Applying SHOrt Sale Delivery Requirements to Non-Reporting OTC Equity Securities;
NASD Notice to Members 06-28 - June 2006
Effective Date: July 3, 2006
Executive Summary
On April 4, 2006, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) approved new Rule 3210, SHOrt Sale Delivery Requirements, which applies SHOrt sale delivery requirements to those equity securities not otherwise covered by the delivery requirements of Regulation SHO, namely non-reporting OTC equity securities.1 Rule 3210, among other things, requires participants of registered clearing agencies to take action on failures to deliver that exist for 13 consecutive settlement days in certain non-reporting securities.
In addition, if the fail to deliver position is not closed out in the requisite time period, a participant of a registered clearing agency or any broker-dealer for which it clears transactions is prohibited from effecting further SHOrt sales in the particular specified security without borrowing, or entering into a bona-fide arrangement to borrow, the security until the fail to deliver position is closed out.
Rule 3210, as adopted, is set forth in Attachment A of this Notice. Also included in this Notice is information about the list of non-reporting securities that meet the requirements of Rule 3210 ("Rule 3210 ThreSHOld Securities List") that NASD will publish. The rule becomes effective on July 3, 2006.
Questions regarding this Notice may be directed as follows: for questions regarding Rule 3210, contact the Legal Section, Market Regulation, at (240) 386-5126; or Office of General Counsel, Regulatory Policy and Oversight, at (202) 728-8071. For questions regarding the Rule 3210 ThreSHOld Securities List, contact NASD Operations at (866) 776-0800.
1 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53596 (April 4, 2006), 71 FR 18392 (April 11, 2006) (File No. SR-NASD-2004-044).
Ny, not an area I completely understand but I'll do my best and maybe someone else can enlighten both of us further.
A new rule was just adopted by the SEC that all non-reporting securities would be included in the Short List (or sho-list). This indicates a short in the sales of the shares.
This rule, I thought, mostly applied to Pink (and Gray?) Sheet stocks. But, on this board and many others I follow there has been discussion about this rule applying to the stock discussed (i.e. ERHE here).
Welllll, I thought, ERHE was reporting so any shorts would've already shown up here prior to this rule going into effect. (This is mostly where I'm confused.)
So, no, by not being listed here, it just means that ERHE has not been shorted.
And, please, anyone that can correct or clarify anything I've posted, I'd welcome the information. I'd love to understand this better.
ERHE did not make sho-list.
http://www.pinksheets.com/marketactivity/reg_sho_list.jsp
Thanks, tc. eom
As always, you've been very helpful. Since it's a free board, I'm going to pass your post along and let him take it from here. Thanks, again.
Thanks, Susie!
OT: Thanks for the reply. I guess I'm confused. I thought if a board wasn't stock specific it was considered a premium board. How do you tell if a board is premium or not? Tia.